336 Responses

According to Joyce, 81% agreed that there were more important issues to focus on, and only 13% said the so-called tape was worthy of further attention. This, said Joyce, was evidence that the matter was of interest only to those within the "Bowen Triangle", while the public was of a higher mind.

There's a gap between what people think they're supposed to think, and report back to pollsters and what they actually think and base their private voting behaviour on.

It's also the case that overall majorities aren't that important here. If 4% of National supporters switch their vote over to Winston Peters on the basis of this affair, then that's a strategic catastrophe for Joyce's party, no matter what the other 96% do.

Has John Key completely lost the plot? The Prime Minister's statement yesterday that National's success in cutting the crime rate has given police spare time to pursue his complaint about the secret taping of his conversation with John Banks sounds astonishingly naive, but is also deeply disturbing.

It invokes the memory of another National leader from a different era - a leader National has long sought to consign to the history books.

It is unlikely that the spirit of Sir Robert Muldoon has taken hold of Key. But you have to wonder.

Framing questions on the assumption that the recording was illegal – without the decision of a judge or even a charge laid yet – seemed fairly leading to me. I asked David Farrar, the owner of Curia, about this last night, and he assured me the actual phrase used was “so-called illegal tapes”, which is a bit more neutral.

And, with no desire to troll for a fight, I’d note Andrew Geddis is not assuming Bradley Ambrose will get the declaratory judgement that he wants – and which, I think it’s fair to say, many here assume is a no-brainer in his favour.

I think it’s worth a crack for Ambrose, but my advice is the same as what Geddis is saying – that he probably won’t get his declamatory judgement because the judge will probably decide it goes to matters of fact that are already the subject of a criminal investigation.

None of which means the recording can confidently be said to be illegal.

Yeah. I was too young really to know why my parents hated Muldoon so much. But every time I talk to my Dad over the phone in Christchurch, he tells me it's like living in Muldoon World 2.0 down there. And I believe him.

And if the phrase "unbridled power" really were uttered during The Conversation, well, you have to wonder.

None of which means the recording can confidently be said to be illegal.

True - but I'd respectfully suggest it also suggests there's a lot of over-confidence flowing in the other direction too. (Of course, no matter what the poor bastard - or bitch, let's not be sexist! - who ends up hearing this rules, it's near-certain someone among the usual suspects is going to scream "political bias". *sigh*)

Meanwhile, anyone else surprised that Winston’s stunning revelations (which the media lapped up like dogs on their own vomit) didn’t live up to the hype. A week is a long time in politics, but where the press and Winston is concerned three decades isn't long enough to make a simple lesson stick.

Initially a question along the lines of do you think ”things are going well at the moment?”

“If the election was held now who would your party vote be for?”

Followed by: “any chance you will change your mind before the election?”

Then questions about whether the following issues were best addressed by either “the National Party, the Labour Party, or another party” (these were theonly options)

Then:

Which party has the best economic policies?Which party will best “crack down on crime”Which party has the best team behind its leader?Which party has the best education policies?Which party will be best for the health system?Which party will be best for the environment?

And a few more in that vein.

This also stood out:

“On a scale where 5 is the best, how would you rate the followingpoliticians?

John KeyBill EnglishPhil Goff”

The questions about the teapot tapes came at the end of the poll, andwere roughly as follows:

1. Should John Key have to answer questions about the so-called illegal tapes?

2. Should there be (paraphrase) much more media coverageof this issue or far less coverage?

3. Has the media handling of this issue been (paraphrase) trivialand shallow or professional and thorough?

Mostly pretty standard stuff, but there are one or two interesting quirks in there.

There’s a gap between what people think they’re supposed to think, and report back to pollsters and what they actually think and base their private voting behaviour on.

This is really crucial. It’s especially interesting in the context of the “Spiral of Silence” phenomenon Chris Trotter made reference to the other week in his (flawed) critique of opinion polls. Flawed in the general case, but I think his analysis is stronger on this point: the release of internal polling data (which is very unusual) in this way can be viewed as a form of moral suasion, a signal that if you care about this topic then you’re in the minority, out of touch, obsessed with trivia and so on.

Precisely what every single Tory I know has been saying all week, with a substantial side-helping of “you should be ashamed of yourselves”. Bless.

More moral persuasion, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10766944I asked about Curio because if he works for no one else there may be an issue with his polling in fact being election promotion (bias in what was called "tone of voice"). Market research companies have legal guidelines as do ad agency copywriters.The MMP stuff is totally quoting the amended yet still onerous message of the anti-MMP advertising.

the release of internal polling data (which is very unusual) in this way can be viewed as a form of moral suasion, a signal that <i>if</i> you care about this topic then you’re part of the minority, out of touch, obsessed with trivia and so on.

It does appear to me that some questions were designed with potential release in mind. Which is not improper, but is certainly interesting.

Phoebe Fletcher at Tumeke (unsurprisingly) believes the situation is bad for National.

The truth is whether we think politics should revolve around policy or personality, it is a gladiator sport for spectators. The last month is a battle for the public attention that provides opportunities for gaffes and also for wins. The increased media attention means that people are looking for a narrative that frames and carries the diverse announcements by bringing them together and providing a human interest angle. And National have provided it by creating a meme that backfired badly.

Precisely what every single Tory I know has been saying all week, with a substantial side-helping of “you should be ashamed of yourselves”. Bless

Thanks, Lew. I disengaged with you on this on Twitter because (quote) "I don't want to say something I can't walk back". Goes double here.

But here's a completely fucking crazy idea: Perhaps a lot of people don't give a shit about things that get us enlightened Public Address-reading types in a rapid boil of furious indignation?. Perhaps they should. Perhaps we need to calm down. More often, it may be a little of both.

Beyond that, I've got nothing else to say because I'm not going to change anyone else's mind and vice versa. Which is what it is.

But here’s a completely fucking crazy idea: Perhaps a lot of people don’t give a shit about things that get us enlightened Public Address-reading types in a rapid boil of furious indignation?. Perhaps they should. Perhaps we need to calm down. More often, it may be a little of both.

You're running close to telling me what to think here, though. You may have to accept that I am sincerely very exercised about the past week's debacle.

Craig, don't take it personal -- I know more Tories than you, and you're nowhere close to the worst offender.

Perhaps a lot of people don't give a shit. Maybe it's turning into a "pox on both your houses" issue which will simply depress voter engagement with politics. I'm not so sure, and even if they claim to not give a shit, there's still an awful lot of McCombsian agenda domination going on here, and ultimately, the pageviews don't lie.